UN Plots War On Free Speech To Stop "Extremism" Online

The United Nations Security Council wants a global “framework” for censoring the Internet, as well as for using government propaganda to “counter” what its apparatchiks call “online propaganda,” “hateful ideologies,” and “digital terrorism.” To that end, the UN Security Council this week ordered the UN “Counter-Terrorism Committee” — yes, that is a real bureaucracy — to draw up a plan by next year. From the Obama administration to the brutal Communist Chinese regime, everybody agreed that it was time for a UN-led crackdown on freedom of speech and thought online — all under the guise of fighting the transparently bogus terror war.

The UN, ridiculed by American critics as the “dictators club,” will reportedly be partnering with some of the world's largest Internet and technology companies in the plot. Among the firms involved in the scheme is Microsoft, which, in a speech before the Security Council on May 11, called for “public-private partnerships” between Big Business and Big Government to battle online propaganda. As this magazine has documented, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and other top tech giants have all publicly embraced the UN and its agenda for humanity. Many of the more than 70 speakers also said it was past time to censor the Internet, with help from the “private sector.”

At the UN meeting this week, the 15 members of the UN Security Council, including some of the most extreme and violent dictatorships on the planet, claimed they wanted to stop extremism and violence from spreading on the Internet. In particular, the governments pretended as if the effort was aimed at Islamist terror groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda, both of which have received crucial backing from leading members of the UN Security Council itself. Terrorism was not defined. Everybody agreed, though, that terror should not be associated with any particular religion, nationality, ethnicity, and so on, even though at least one delegation fingered the Israeli government.

In its “presidential statement” after the session, the UN Security Council claimed that “terrorism” could be defeated only with “international law” and through collaboration between the UN and emerging regional governments such as the various “unions” being imposed on Europe, Africa, Eurasia, South America, and beyond. “The Security Council stresses that terrorism can only be defeated by a sustained and comprehensive approach involving the active participation and collaboration of all States, international and regional organizations ... consistent with the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy,” it said. Of course, the UN still has no actual definition of terrorism, but it is in the process of usurping vast new powers under the guise of fighting this undefined nemesis.

However, the UN, in its ongoing war against free speech and actual human rights around the world, has offered some strong hints about its agenda. According to UN officials, the plan to regulate speech on the Internet will complement another, related UN plot known formally as the “Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism.” As The New American reported last year, the plan calls for a global war on “ideologies.” That crusade will include, among other components, planetary efforts to stamp out all “anti-Muslim bigotry,” anti-immigrant sentiments, and much more, the UN and Obama explained. So-called “non-violent extremism” is also in the UN's crosshairs, as is free speech generally.

It was not immediately clear how a UN-led war on “anti-Muslim bigotry” would stop ISIS. The savage terror group, which according to top U.S. officials was created and funded by Obama's anti-ISIS coalition, served as the crucial justification for the UN plan. However, based on the outlines of the UN extremism scheme released so far, it is clear that there will be no serious efforts to address the growing extremism of the UN or the violent extremism of many of its mostly autocratic member regimes. Instead, the “extremism” plan will serve as a pretext to impose a broad range of truly extremist policies at the national, regional, and international level.

Seemingly oblivious to the totalitarian absurdity of the comments, top UN officials called for safeguards against “excessive punishment” wielded against those who express their views on the Internet. “The protection of free media can be a defense against terrorist narratives,” UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson told the Security Council during the meeting this week in a stunning example of double-speak. “There must be no arbitrary or excessive punishment against people who are simply expressing their opinions.” It was not immediately clear what specific punishments for free speech would be considered non-excessive. But in the United States, despite UN claims about pseudo-“human rights” requiring censorship, any and all “punishment” for expressing one's views is strictly prohibited.

Separately, the Communist Chinese dictatorship, which now dominates various UN bureaucracies, enthusiastically embraced the UN's efforts. Speaking on behalf of the brutal regime, Liu Jieyi, Beijing's permanent representative to the UN, said that institutions promoting “extremist ideologies” needed to be "closed down." Apparently he was not referring to the “extremist ideology” of the Communist Party of China or its brutal regime, which has murdered more innocent human beings than any other in history. Beijing alone has killed more than 60 million people, not including those butchered in forced abortions. Other communist governments allied with Beijing have murdered tens of millions more, just in the last century.

In Libya, a similar situation occurred. The Obama administration, under the guise of enforcing an illegitimate UN resolution, openly partnered with self-declared al-Qaeda leaders to overthrow former U.S. terror-war ally and brutal dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Congress was never consulted, making Obama's war illegal and unconstitutional, in addition to the serious crime of providing aid to designated terror organizations. Today, thanks to that extremism, Libya is a failed state awash in heavy military weaponry and terror training camps. Much of the Obama administration-supplied aid for terror groups in Libya was transferred to supporting terror groups in Syria following the fall of Gadhafi's regime.

Echoing the UN's rhetoric, Crown claimed “international law” and fascist-style “public-private partnerships,” in which governments and Big Business join forces, were the appropriate response. He also said the “international community,” a deceptive term generally used to refer to the UN and its member governments, needed to “work together in a coordinated and transparent way.” The UN Security Council agreed, saying in its final declaration that there needed to be “more effective ways for governments to partner with ... private sector industry partners.” It is hardly a new agenda.

As The New American reported previously, the technology giants — all of which are regularly represented at the globalist Bilderberg summits — have also emerged as enthusiastic supporters of the UN's radical “Agenda 2030.”According to the agreement, the goal is “transforming our world,” redistributing wealth at the international level, empowering the institutions of global governance, and more. Among the mega-corporations proudly backing the scheme are the world’s top three search engines: Google, Microsoft’s Bing, and Yahoo. It was not immediately clear whether those corporations’ support for the deeply controversial UN agenda would affect the supposed impartiality of their search results. But critics of the UN plan expressed alarm nonetheless.

Of course, a handful of the more than 70 people who spoke at the Security Council confab paid lip service to freedom of speech and freedom of thought. The Iraqi government's delegation, for example, emphasized differentiating between “freedom of thought and extremist ideologies.” Others said the war on extremism could not be used to justify persecuting critics of governments. Some of the speakers no doubt had good intentions, too.

However, putting the UN in charge of fighting extremism and dangerous ideologies would be like putting a mafia boss in charge of fighting crime — it is patently absurd, even grotesque. Most of the UN's member regimes are undemocratic, to be generous, and many of them are led by genocidal psychopaths who murder with impunity. Among other UN member states, those enslaving North Korea, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Sudan, China, and many more are run by criminals and mass-murderers who epitomize terrorism and violent extremism. Plus, virtually every terror group on earth today has its roots in state-sponsorship, including ISIS and al-Qaeda.

With all these thin skinned leaders, any true journalist is asking themselves whether to retire and get the fuck outta dodge or open myself up to ever more expanding risk of prosecution for bullshit trumped up charges.

Free speech will probably die about 30 minutes before the US goes nuclear against the Russians.

Or rather, the ability to speak freely will be lost as they shut down the net and gag online malcontedness. Only temporarily, of course, and justfied as for the sheeples "own good" due to "security concerns".

Kinda like the PPT shutting down the NYSE "temporarily" every time it looks like the shit is about to hit the fan.

So in advance (because ZH will be one of the first casualties), its been a real privilege mixing it with you guys for the past 5 years or so and up until that point.

The UN itself is a "transparently bogus" entity. I have called many times here on ZH for moving it to Yemen where they could sincerely (cough, cough) work at doing the world some real good for a change rather than partying their heads off in restaurants and penthouses in NYC.

You may want to read the article again very slowly. These anti-terror efforts have taken a very bizarre turn as of late.

When these censorship effort supposedly against 'terrorism' pop up nowadays, they always seem to have overly-broad provisions against anyone inciting violence or hatred. In other words, they end up really being to punish anyone criticizing Israel or it's policies. Think that's a bit tin-foil-hat? Watch how the U.N. will eventually craft their anti-terrorism bullshit rules. It will really be anti-free-speech. Radical extremism will be the focus, but they'll sneak in enough rules to enforce the following:

Calling out Trump's clear Israeli-firster bias and Adelson 'servicing'? OK for now, but banned after he is elected.

The U.N. is Israel's last resort when the anti-Semitic fuckers in the U.S. refuse to change their laws per Israeli-firster congressional demands to do so. Israel will not let your fucking Constitution stand in it's way to control you. You fucking goyim will obey somebody with regards to promoting Israeli-firster views. The U.N. looks like a convenient tool.

For the most part, I agree. For all the parts that really matter to Israel, they make sure to have plenty of influence. I'll believe no Israel bias as soon as I see the sanctions against Israel for annexing the Golan.

This particular effort comes from the U.N. Security Council - probably THE most Israeli-firster body in the U.N. with the U.S. carrying water for Israel, of course. Neither China nor Russia want's the burden of the predictable anti-Semitism charge if they veto some pro-Israeli clownfuckery. They mostly remain silent, so Israeli interests win out in the end.

I am using a VPN that allows connecting over servers all over the world (Ivacy, special offer $22/year). I have noticed a few times that I can't get ZH from France. There are other countries as well but I can't remember them.

~"The United Nations Security Council wants a global “framework” for censoring the Internet, as well as for using government propaganda to “counter” what its apparatchiks call “online propaganda,” “hateful ideologies,” and “digital terrorism.”"~

Here is my reply to the entire United Nations, the Chinese and Barack Hussein Obama:

"Fuck you, you can't have it."

My American Constitution will never bow to your censorship without a full blown war. Go and collectively fuck yourselves.

This is a subtle jab at climate change deniers and folks who want to keep female bathrooms for females only and patriots who want to keep their wives and dauighters safe from getting attacked and raped in the streets by The Invaders.

Funny how Obama has trashed most of the Constitution yet all we get is 'I will huff and I'll puff and blow your house down' on sites like ZH. Even the Patriots don't know when is enuf. But just like 'we will know an extremist when we see one' elites have no idea when patriots will act.

What we have here are a small group who have a perverted sense of self importance. These tiny little minds have a desire to make the masses believe that they are superior in economics and society, when in reality they're everything to the contrary. They swim around in their delusional manufactured convoluted cesspool minds busily concocting schemes to control the world. Accepting limited control is exactly what they cannot come to grips with. For them their is no guilt, no pity, no mercy, no shame. They look to the masses as objects to abuse subjugating them to their maligned sense of grandiosity fueling their inner thirst to feel important and have full control.

Free speech is a death knell to their schemes, for free speech interferes with their witch doctor programming of the naive and ignorant to abandon reason. They know those who have critical thinking skills and a reasonable understanding of world history can see through them with complete transparency, just like our Forefathers and all those, in their own blood, sacrificing their lives to prevent this tyranny of the individual and society in general.

Horror to them are those who scrutinize their motives, their brain dead schemes pulling their covers for the whole world to see in FREE SPEECH!

"These tiny little minds have a desire to make the masses believe that they are superior in economics and society, when in reality they're everything to the contrary. They swim around in their delusional manufactured convoluted cesspool minds busily concocting schemes to control the world."

Wow, that describes Ghordius to a Tee!

If Ghordius was presented with an EU cock and a UN cock, I wonder which one he would suck off first.

Do you know how many luxury apartments Trump can put in that building! The views! The land! The giant hall that can be rented out to concert promoters! I bet he has already commissioned the giant golden Trump sign for the roof.